Companies testing cosmetics on animals are not just applying lipstick to a rabbit to gauge its reaction; they are looking for irritation, blistering, and swelling. The tests being performed on animals are, oftentimes, painful and can even be fatal. Experiments can range from testing chemicals on skin and eyes, to forcing the animals to ingest lethal doses of product ingredients. Many cosmetic companies currently implementing such testing, ignoring the fact that it is not required by law in the United States. These practices are unnecessary and cruel. Laws need to be instated to encourage cosmetic companies to begin using alternative, more humane methods, while completely out-phasing animal testing.
Cosmetic companies do not have to test their products on animals, but there are certain requirements that must be met if companies choose to go that route. While it seems acceptable for companies to continue animal testing as long as they follow the minimum requirements, it does not mean that the tests they do are not causing pain. In his book Animals Matter, Bekoff writes of the lethal-dose test. He describes this test as “an attempt to measure the toxicity or potential harmfulness of products such as cosmetics or drugs by forcing live animals to ingest the substance to be tested…the dose at which 50% of the animals die is called the lethal-dose 50, or LD50” (129). To force an animal to ingest an ingredient to see how much it takes to kill causes much unnecessary suffering and always results in death.
It could be argued by some that it is crucial to subject animals to such tests, as it is important to understand what affects certain substances can have on the human body. It is important to know if something could have a negative eff...
... middle of paper ...
...cause a product is deemed safe for an animal does not mean that is should be made available to humans without further testing, especially dangerous chemicals.
Granted, it is likely that animal testing will continue for a long time but, it doesn’t mean it should be deemed acceptable. Consumers needs to inform companies if they do not agree with such procedures so they will begin to move away from them. While it is understood that some animal testing cannot be replaced with alternatives at this time, what can be changed is a good start. This would benefit both parties; the animals being tested on and the cosmetic companies getting results from the testing. The animals would be spared the pain they go through and the cosmetics companies would get results more suited to what they are looking for. One step at a time until animal testing can be done away with completely.
“If you want to test cosmetics, why do it on some poor animal that hasn't done anything? They should use prisoners who have been convicted of murder or rape instead. So, rather than seeing if perfume irritates a bunny rabbit's eyes, they should throw it in Charles Manson's eyes and ask him if it hurts.” (DeGeneres, DG). Think about those animals imprisoned in cold cages, having nothing to do but wait, waiting in fear, knowing that when the time comes their cages will be opened, but not to set them free. Unable to react, unable to defend themselves, they rot in pain and mourn with isolation. And yet all we, humans, do is sit back and watch them suffer. Animal testing is the abuse of animals to develop new products. Although some people are against animal testing others agree that animals are needed in researches to find upgraded and new cures for developing diseases, to find advanced aesthetic products, and to find refine household products leading to a more satisfying quality.
Animals are tested on for many cosmetic and medical products, but the treatment of the animals and the quality of the test results are often less satisfactory than the consumer realizes. Every person has most likely purchased either a pharmaceutical or cosmetic product in his or her lives, but the careless techniques for making these products may astound individuals that rely on drugs for everyday use. According to the Food and Drug Administration, “every year about fifteen -hundred” drugs are created, but “twelve-hundred” are deemed unusable for people. Regardless of such a high number or drug rejections, about “one-million Americans are hospitalized from flaws in drugs” (“Animal Experimentation,” 2009). Most of these drugs were tested on animals before being approved for human use, which proves that animal testing is not a successful method of experimentation. Some factors should be considered when deciding what testing method is most helpful to society; whether an animal has similar genetics to humans, if testing animals are treated humanely, and the costs of conducting the tests. Scientists and animal support groups have quarreled for centuries over the morals of using testing animals and human safety when using animals for toxic experimentations. Individuals for animal testing usually claim that there are no alternatives or it is the safest out of all the methods, but he or she may not be aware of modern technologies that are capable of making a new and improved data for certain pharmaceutical products.
Animal testing has long played a part in the science of testing, and it still plays a very important role in the medical world. Testing on animals in order to create a cure for AIDS is one thing, but testing on animals for human vanity is another. Animal testing is used to test the safety of a product. It has kept some very unsafe substances out of the cosmetic world. However, in this day in age, animal testing is not the only way to test the safety of a product. Animal testing in cosmetics has decreased over the years. However, it is still used by many companies in America. Animal testing is not only cruel, but it is also unnecessary in today’s advanced scientific world.
Sadly according to the Humane Society International (HSI) article About Animal Testing “in the United states alone around 26 million animals are tested each year for medical and commercial research” (HSI) even though animal testing is not required to ensure that the cosmetic being sold are safe. From those 26 million animals being tested most are not protected by the federal Animal Welfare Act. The animal welfare act does not include birds, rats and mice bred for research, and it doesn’t include cold-blooded animals. Animals testing should be banned because the animals tested suffer immensely, also animal tested is unethical, and because there are many alternatives.
Millions of animals are being unneedlessly tested on for cosmetics, even though there are plenty of alternatives available and most of the results are unreliable or not applicable to humans. Although the fight against animal testing has made huge progress recently, America has yet to stop this cruel practice and chooses to torture animals while other countries are making a stop to the testing (“Animal Testing 101”).
Currently hundreds of thousands of animals die while being tested on for cosmetics. The animals being tested on die because of allergic reactions, mostly, and scientists do not want to give them anything to stop the allergic reaction because it would interfere with their research, so they let them die. Other times the animal dies because the testing freaks them out and they go crazy and no one can calm them so they have to put them down. Cosmetics tested on animals should be banned because they use exotic...
Throughout history, beginning as early as 500 BC, animals have been used to test products that will later be utilized by humans (“Animal Testing” 4), what isn’t publicly discussed is the way it will leave the animals after the process is done. Many innocent rabbits, monkeys, mice, and even popular pets such as dogs are harmed during the testing application of cosmetics, medicine, perfumes, and many other consumer products (Donaldson 2). Nevertheless, there are many people whom support the scandal because "it is a legal requirement to carry out animal testing to ensure they are safe and effective” for human benefit (Drayson). The overall question here is should it even be an authorized form of experimentation in the United States, or anywhere else? The fact of the matter is that there are alternatives to remove animals out of the equation for good (“Alternatives” 1). They are cheaper, and less invasive than the maltreatment of the 26 million innocent animals that are subjected to the heartlessness of testing each year (“Animal Testing” 4). All in all, due to the harsh effects of animal testing, it should be treated as animal cruelty in today’s society.
Without cosmetic testing, millions of animals lives will not have to be compromised and spared for the testing of cosmetic products. Animal testing is costly as one has to incorporate the spending on the animal’s food, caging, maintenance etc. That money can be used elsewhere, possibly to invest in other alternatives. Without animals to be the subject of cosmetic testing, the industries will have to turn towards alternative methods of testing which have been shown to be more effective in terms of the success in results and more cost effective as well. Finally there will be an overall increase in public morality and virtue as a result of ending cosmetic testing on animals. Happiness will be maximized for both humans and animals and humans will continue to fulfill their duty to respect the life of all beings, including animals. Society will be better off without such acts of cruelty and the lives of animals won’t be used as a means only. Allowing cosmetic testing on animals ensures the safety of products for human use, however the results are not always successful. Some also argue that animals do not share the same rights as humans do by law, therefore it is acceptable to continue testing on animals. Based on the probable consequences of acting on the presumption, it is evident that there is more good than harm brought about by acting on this presumption and confirms that it is morally wrong to continue cosmetic testing on animals due to lack of virtue and the wrong in using animals as mere means to our superficial
Testing cosmetics on animals is a very controversial issue that has grown over the past years. I believe that cosmetic animal testing is wrong and should be banned because it is cruel, inaccurate, not very reliable, and has been proven to be unnecessary. Approximately 200,000 animals will suffer and die every year for cosmetics around the world. We as a whole have all decided that this is not necessary which is why we stopped making testing on animal cosmetics something that had to be done. Companies still continue to do it. Not only do you have the power to speak up for what you believe in, you can also start to vote with your dollar. Stop and look at your cosmetics to understand where you are voting.
Incidentally cosmetics companies kill millions of animals every year to test their products. Some of these companies state they test on animals to establish the safety of their products and ingredients for consumers. The Food and Drug Admin...
Each year, thousands of animals are brutally tortured in laboratories, in the name of cosmetic research. A movement to ban animal testing for cosmetic purposes has been gaining popularity, with many companies hopping on the bandwagon against this research. New alternatives have been developed to eliminate the necessity to test on animals. This is only a small beginning of what is necessary to end these immoral acts. Animal testing in cosmetics is useless and cruel, and can be accomplished by other methods of research to end the suffering of animals.
Simple household items such as lotions, shampoos and cosmetics aren’t very expensive and are within reach for the public, yet the public is not knowledgeable of the fact that the products that they use everyday are put through a series of tests which involve the use of harmless animals. Several large commercial companies do not make products for animals; they decide that using these harmless creatures for the testing of their products, could be cause to be harmful to animals still go forward with these types of procedures on an everyday basis. Although these animals are unable to defend themselves or signs of any form of consent for the near death procedures, these companies find this as a cheap solution for testing their products before placing them on the market. There are many other alternatives to testing animals such as embryonic stem cell research. Animal experimentation is wrong and it can be avoided but companies which are greedy for money chose not to.
It still comes as a surprise to me that with all the technology in today’s society, we are still relying on animals for cosmetic research. Some people think that it is acceptable and even justified to test on mere animals rather than risk hurting people. So, for these kinds of people, animal testing makes perfect sense. However, in my opinion, animals are living creatures and have the right to live out their lives as nature intended rather than simply surviving in cages while being poked and prodded with whatever scientists fancy. I think it is depressing and sort of grotesque that I am using products that have been tested on animals that are even commonly bred as our pets. So, I began my research to find out what companies still test on animals, why they do so, and what other alternatives they could use in place of animal testing.
Animal testing has become extremely costly. Animal testing results are not quick, especially for cosmetics. When testing a product it needs to be continually applied to detect if it’s going to irritate the skin or eyes. This can take days or weeks. During this time you have to keep the animals alive long enough to see the result. Therefore also having to supply food and water costing even more $$$. For example the eye irritant test involving rabbits to see how a product or chemical will react on human eyes cost around 1,800$ while the alternative in vitro method only cost 1,400$. Not only is the alternative more accurate but its much more cost effective and over time those 400$ will add up. Another common example is the skin sensation test, which is where a product is placed on a shaved animals skin to see how it reacts. The cost for the animal test is 6,000$ and the alternative is only 3,000$. That is a lot of money that could be used to make the product better or for the company to keep.
Cosmetic animal testing has been a controversial topic for decades but has recently gained more attention from the media due to oppositional organizations such as People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA). Those in favor of animal experimentation make the argument that they are taking animals’ lives to save humans’, but is it really necessary to subject animals to torturous conditions or painful experiments in the name of science? Animal experimentation needs to be abolished because it is unethical and selfish to destroy an animal 's life.